Методологическое разнообразие в российской  социологии: анализ исследований ценностей

Marina A. Kashina; Sergey  Tkach

doi:10.21638/spbu12.2021.201

Authors

Marina A. Kashina North-West Institute of Management — Branch of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, 57/43, Sredny pr. V.O., St. Petersburg, 199178, Russian Federation
Sergey Tkach Regional Public Organization of Social Projects in the Field of Well-being of the Population “Stellit”, 3, ul. Mira, St. Petersburg, 197101, Russian Federation

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu12.2021.201

Abstract

Methodological diversity is a condition for the development of sociology since the complexity of social reality does not allow adhering to one universal scientific paradigm. At the same time, the nature of methodological diversity in research is an indicator of the alignment of forces of agents in the field of science. Hence the research question arises — how is the influence of the external contour of science (business, public organizations, media, politicians, etc.) manifested in the methodology used by the authors of highly cited articles on values? The work is of qualitative design and the empirical base was formed by the texts of 42 of the most cited Russian articles on the issues of values posted on the RSCI platform in 2016–2019 and indexed by international scientometric databases (Scopus, Wos CC). The choice of articles on the study of values as an empirical object for assessing the nature of methodological diversity in sociology is explained by the complexity and multilevel nature of this phenomenon, and the existence of various approaches to its study, which provides ample opportunities for various methods and techniques. The research optics was the structuralist concept of the inner and outer contours of science. Analysis of the texts of articles showed that the quantitative methodology dominates (29 out of 42). In these studies, the signs of the pressure of the outer contour of science are most pronounced. The least pressure is experienced by authors of works in qualitative design, but there are very few studies in the sample of highly cited articles (2 out of 42), and the topic of values in them is optional. Promising areas for the continuation of the research are related to the analysis of the phenomenon of imitation in the process of producing scientific knowledge and its impact on methodological diversity.

Keywords:

sociology, values, methodology, field of science, structuralism

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Литература

Штомпка П. Много социологий для одного мира («Большая теория» и теоретический плюрализм) // Социологические исследования. 1991. № 2. С. 13–23.

Бурдьё П. Социальное пространство: поля и практики / пер. с франц.; отв. ред. перевода, сост. и послесл. Н.А.Шматко. М.: Институт экспериментальной социологии; СПб.: Алетейя, 2005.

Камик Ч. Двойственность социологии науки П.Бурдье. Camic Ch. Bourdieu’s cleft sociology of science. Minerva. L., 2011. Vol. 49, iss. 3. P. 275–293 // Социальные и гуманитарные науки. Отечественная и зарубежная литература. Сер. 8. Науковедение: реферативный журнал. 2012. № 2. С. 67–73.

Панеях Э., Титаев К., Шклярук М. Траектория уголовного дела: институциональный анализ. СПб.: Изд-во Европейского университета в Санкт-Петербурге, 2018.

Beach D., Gejl Kaas J. The Great Divides: Incommensurability, the Impossibility of Mixed-Methodology, and What to Do about It // International Studies Review. 2020. Vol. 22, iss. 2. P. 214–235.

Батыгин Г.С., Девятко И.Ф. Миф о «качественной социологии» // Социологический журнал. 1994. № 2. С. 28–42.

Gerring J. Mere Description // British Journal of Political Science. 2012. Vol. 42, iss. 4. P. 721–746.

Creswell J.W. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2009.

Семёнова В.В. Стратегия комбинации качественного и количественного подходов при изучении поколений // Интер. 2014. № 8. С. 5–15.

Лаба Л.Я. Способы интеграции качественных и количественных методов в социологических исследованиях // Социологические исследования. 2004. № 2. С. 124–129.

Schmidt N.M., Teschner N., Negev M. Scientific Advice and Administrative Traditions: The Role of Chief Scientists in Climate Change Adaptation // Review of Policy Research. 2018. No. 35 (6). P. 859–880.

Trofimova I.N. Who is in Charge of Science: Men view “Time” as more fixed, “Reality” as less real, and “Order” as less ordered // Cognitive Systems Research. 2012. Vol. 15–16. P. 50–56.

McComas K.A. Researcher Views About Funding Sources and Conflicts of Interest in Nanotechnology // Science and Engineering Ethics. 2012. No. 18 (4). P. 699–717.

Ho S. S., Goh T.J., Leung Y.W. Let’s Nab Fake Science News: Predicting scientists’ support for interventions using the influence of presumed media influence model // Sage Journals. Journalism. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1464884920937488

Tsfati Y., Cohen J., Gunther A.C. The influence of presumed media influence on news about science and scientists // Science Communication. 2011. No. 33 (2). P. 143–166.

Li P., Mu X. The effects of government environmental regulations on enterprise technological innovation under the pressure of carbon tariffs // 2nd International Conference on Information Science and Engineering, ICISE2010 — Proceedings. 2010. Art. no. 5689975. P. 3255–3258.

Соколов М., Титаев К. Провинциальная и туземная наука // Антропологический форум. 2013. № 19. С. 239–275.

Сафонова М.А., Винер Б.Е. Сетевой анализ социтирований этнологических публикаций в российских периодических изданиях: предварительные результаты // Социология: методология, методы, математическое моделирование. 2013. № 36. С. 140–176.

Mingers J. Combining IS Research Methods: Towards a Pluralist Methodology // Information Systems Research. 2001. Vol. 12, iss. 3. P. 240–259.

Социальные проблемы: конструкционистское прочтение / cост. И.Г.Ясавеев. Казань: Изд-во Казанск. ун-та, 2007.

Радаев В.В. Возможна ли позитивная программа для российской социологии // Социологические исследования. 2008. № 7 (291). C. 24–33.

Тихонов А.В. Посткризисный синдром отечественной социологии и ее проблемы // Социологические исследования. 2008. № 7 (291). С. 34–46.

Ameen K. The Barriers to Producing High Quality Library and Information Science Research in Developing Countries: The case of Pakistan // Journal of Scholarly Publishing. 2013. No. 44 (3). P. 256–273.

Jiménez-Aleixandre M. P., Reigosa C. Contextualizing practices across epistemic levels in the chemistry laboratory // Science Education. 2006. No. 90 (4). P. 707–733.

References

Sztompka P. Many Sociologies for One World (“Big theory” and theoretical pluralism). Sociologicheskie issledovaniia, 1991, no. 2, pp. 13–23. (In Russian)

Bourdieu P. Social Space: Fields and Practices. Transl. from French; resp. ed. of translation, comp. and after. N.A. Shmatko. Moscow, Institute of Experimental Sociology Press; St. Petersburg, Aleteia Publ., 2005. (In Russian)

Camic Ch. The Duality of the Sociology of Science P.Bourdieu. Camic Ch. Bourdieu’s cleft sociology of science Minerva. L., 2011. Vol. 49, iss. 3, pp. 275–293. Social’nye i gumanitarnye nauki. Otechestvennaia i zarubezhnaia literatura. Ser. 8. Naukovedenie: referativnyi zhurnal, 2012, no. 2, pp. 67–73. (In Russian)

Paneyah E., Titaev K., Shklyaruk M. The Trajectory of a Criminal Case: institutional analysis. St.Petersburg, European University in Saint Petersburg Press, 2018. (In Russian)

Beach D., Gejl Kaas J. The Great Divides: Incommensurability, the Impossibility of Mixed-Methodology, and What to Do about It. International Studies Review, 2020, vol. 22, iss. 2, pp. 214–235.

Batygin G. S., Devyatko I.F. Myth about “Quantitative Sociology”. Sociologicheskii zhurnal, 1994, no. 2, pp. 28–42. (In Russian)

Gerring J. Mere Description. British Journal of Political Science, 2012, vol. 42, iss. 4, pp. 721–746.

Creswell J.W. Research Design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage, Thousand Oaks, 2009.

Semyonova V.V. A Strategy for Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches in the Study of Generations. Inter, 2014, no. 8, pp. 5–15. (In Russian)

Laba L.Ia. Methods of Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Sociological Research. Sociologicheskie issledovaniia, 2004, no. 2, pp. 124–129. (In Russian)

Schmidt N.M., Teschner N., Negev M. Scientific Advice and Administrative Traditions: The Role of Chief Scientists in Climate Change Adaptation. Review of Policy Research, 2018, no. 35 (6), pp. 859–880.

Trofimova I.N. Who is in Charge of Science: Men view “Time” as more fixed, “Reality” as less real, and “Order” as less ordered. Cognitive Systems Research, 2012, vol. 15–16, pp. 50–56.

McComas K.A. Researcher Views About Funding Sources and Conflicts of Interest in Nanotechnology. Science and Engineering Ethics, 2012, no. 18 (4), pp. 699–717.

Ho S. S., Goh T.J., Leung Y.W. Let’s Nab Fake Science News: Predicting scientists’ support for interventions using the influence of presumed media influence model. Sage Journals. Journalism, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1464884920937488

Tsfati Y., Cohen J., Gunther A.C. The Influence of Presumed Media Influence on News about Science and Scientists. Science Communication, 2011, no. 33 (2), pp. 143–166.

Li P., Mu X. The Effects of Government Environmental Regulations on Enterprise Technological Innovation under the Pressure of Carbon Tariffs. 2nd International Conference on Information Science and Engineering, ICISE2010 — Proceedings, 2010, art. no. 5689975, pp. 3255–3258.

Sokolov M., Titaev K. Provincial and Indigenous Science. Antropologicheskii forum, 2013, no. 19, pp. 239–275. (In Russian)

Safonova M.A., Viner B.E. Network Analysis of Socitations of Ethnological Publications in Russian Periodicals: Preliminary Results, Moscow. Sotsiologiia: metodologiia, metody, matematicheskoe modelirovanie, 2013, no. 36, pp. 140–176. (In Russian)

Mingers J. Combining IS Research Methods: Towards a Pluralist Methodology, Information Systems Research, 2001, vol. 12, iss. 3, pp. 240–259.

Social Problems: constructionistic interpretation. Comp. I.G.Iasaveev. Kazan, Izd-vo Kazanskogo un-ta Publ., 2007. (In Russian)

Radaev V.V. Is a Positive Program Possible for Russian Sociology, Sociologicheskie issledovaniia, 2008, no. 7 (291), pp. 24–33. (In Russian)

Tikhonov A.V. Post-crisis Syndrome of Domestic Sociology and its Problems, Sociologicheskie issledovaniia, 2008, no. 7 (291), pp. 34–46. (In Russian)

Ameen K. The Barriers to Producing High Quality Library and Information Science Research in Developing Countries: The case of Pakistan. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 2013, no. 44 (3), pp. 256–273.

Jiménez-Aleixandre M. P., Reigosa C. Contextualizing Practices across Epistemic Levels in the Chemistry Laboratory. Science Education, 2006, no. 90 (4), pp. 707–733.